NY Times: In Italian Schools, Reading, Writing and Recognizing Fake News

[Mick West]

An interesting reaction against fake news and conspiracy theories comes from Italy, where a new school program attempts to inoculate an entire generation against disinformation by giving them a toolbox of techniques for spotting it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/18/world/europe/italy-fake-news.html

After reading the horrors in Dante's "Inferno," Italian students will soon turn to the dangers of the digital age. While juggling math assignments, they'll also tackle worksheets prepared by reporters from the national broadcaster RAI. And separate from the weekly hour of religion, they will receive a list of what amounts to a new set of Ten Commandments for the digital age.

Among them: Thou shalt not share unverified news; thou shall ask for sources and evidence; thou shall remember that the internet and social networks can be manipulated.

The lessons are part of an extraordinary experiment by the Italian government, in cooperation with leading digital companies including Facebook, to train a generation of students steeped in social media how to recognize fake news and conspiracy theories online.

"Fake news drips drops of poison into our daily web diet and we end up infected without even realizing it," said Laura Boldrini, the president of the Italian lower house of Parliament, who has spearheaded the project with the Italian Ministry of Education.

"It's only right to give these kids the possibility to defend themselves from lies," said Ms. Boldrini, who is left-leaning but not affiliated with any political party. The initiative will be rolled out in 8,000 high schools across the country starting on Oct. 31.

The initiative is being watched as a kind of pilot project by other European countries, and by origanizations like Facebook that have a fake news problem. Facebook is helping promote the program.

Facebook was quick to applaud the program. Laura Bononcini, chief of public policy for Facebook in Italy, Greece and Malta, said on Tuesday that "the program is part of an international effort. Education and media literacy are a crucial part of our effort to curb the spread of false news, and collaboration with schools is pivotal."

Ms. Boldrini also noted that Facebook was contributing by promoting the initiative through targeted ads to high-school-age users, and she said she hoped that the program, which aimed to show students how their "likes" were monetized and politicized, could become a "pilot program" for Facebook throughout Europe.

Great intentions, but it will be very interesting to see how it pans out over the first year. One also wonders how such a program might come across in the US in the current political environment. Conspiracy theorists themselves are quick to label news they do not like as fake news, but would they be suspicious of a school program that attempted to teach children to verify information for themselves? "Do your own research" is a popular refrain - but is often applied backwards, meaning "watch research or propaganda videos created by others". How would those people feel when they children came home from school newly skeptical of their parent's YouTube knowledge?

 

[DJC]

Terrible Idea .90% of the news is fake falsified embellished or out right lies ..i dont know any politician that tells the truth they all have zero credibility .there are more agendas being paid for and more corrupted information or straight propaganda that is coming from their own teachers for whatever country they live in ...this is just more brainwashing to fit the agenda the powers that be want to push . way too intrusive and personal and a very slippery slope for any parent to let this go on ...

 

[deirdre]

Terrible Idea .90% of the news is fake falsified embellished or out right lies ..i dont know any politician that tells the truth they all have zero credibility .there are more agendas being paid for and more corrupted information or straight propaganda that is coming from their own teachers for whatever country they live in ...this is just more brainwashing to fit the agenda the powers that be want to push . way too intrusive and personal and a very slippery slope for any parent to let this go on ...

I think high school is the perfect age to teach critical thinking skills as they relate to media. High school kids don't typically idolize their teachers, if you wait till college to teach "communications", students are more likely to idolize their "professors" and fall for the professors biases. I think college kids fall for this because there is a suggestion that they are now adults and professors view them more as equals.. where in high school the kids know the teachers don't view them as equals; so I think high school kids, in general, are more skeptical of what they are taught.

Basically I think more high school students (than college students) will use the skills the teacher teaches to 'debunk' the teacher. Cause that is the age kids have been 'awakened' to the fact that adults are stupid, and they start to question everything adults say.

 

[DJC]

Basically I think more high school students (than college students) will use the skills the teacher teaches to 'debunk' the teacher. Cause that is the age kids have been 'awakened' to the fact that adults are stupid, and they start to question everything adults say.[/QUOTE]

i agree it seems in high school you are somewhat smart and free thinking and these college kids get hypnotized by these professors and adopt their ideology .

 

[cloudspotter]

Terrible Idea .90% of the news is fake falsified embellished or out right lies ..i dont know any politician that tells the truth they all have zero credibility .there are more agendas being paid for and more corrupted information or straight propaganda that is coming from their own teachers for whatever country they live in ...this is just more brainwashing to fit the agenda the powers that be want to push . way too intrusive and personal and a very slippery slope for any parent to let this go on ...

I'm not sure I follow your logic here. News is fake and politicians lie so teaching people that information can be manipulated and that sources and evidence should be be checked and verified is a terrible idea?

 

[DJC]

YES , its a very slippery slope ...Who will decide whats real, you ,me? our opinions are not the same and the next 100 peoples wont be either ...So who will write the curriculum ...Oh thats right the lying propaganda pushing government ..See the problem? ...unless they are going to make a simple motto ...QUESTION EVERYTHING ..or believe half of what you see and nothing of what you hear ..then you leave the kids open to be manipulated and conditioned to believe what you teach them is right and everything else is wrong ..because you think so ..

 

[deirdre]

our opinions are not the same

fact checking is not about opinions. fact checking is about checking facts. The curriculum would be (should be) just teaching children fact checking skills and how not to fall for advertisments (product sales) that disguise themselves as real news articles. You see this sales tactic used on Yahoo News all the time.

ex:

NPR's Kelly McEvers talks to Professor Sam Wineburg about his study that tested over 7,800 teenagers about their ability to differentiate fake from real news and sponsored ads from news articles.

.................

SAM WINEBURG: We showed them a picture of daisies that looked like they were deformed. There was a claim on a website that they were the result of the nuclear disaster at the Fukushima district in Japan. The photograph had no attribution. There was nothing that indicated that it was from anywhere.

And we asked students, is - does this photograph provide proof that the kind of nuclear disaster caused these aberrations in nature? And we found that over 80 percent of the high school students that we gave this to them had an extremely difficult time making that determination. They didn't ask where it came from. They didn't verify it. They simply accepted the picture as fact.

Source: http://www.npr.org/2016/11/22/503052574/stanford-study-finds-most-students-vulnerable-to-fake-news

 

[txt29]

DJC, it appears to me that you are shooting yourself in the foot. On one hand you tell that news are full of lies and propaganda (which may be well true sometimes), and on the other hand you seem to be upset that students are going to be tought to verify news. It makes no sense.

Would you perhaps prefer that children are let in the dark and tought to accept all news without asking any questions at all? Or do you want that they are careful with accepting news selectively (for example distrusting/verifying only official news, while accepting without hesitation "alternative" news)? If so, then by which pattern? It makes no sense to me either.

 

[DJC]

DJC, it appears to me that you are shooting yourself in the foot. On one hand you tell that news are full of lies and propaganda (which may be well true sometimes), and on the other hand you seem to be upset that students are going to be tought to verify news. It makes no sense.

Would you perhaps prefer that children are let in the dark and tought to accept all news without asking any questions at all? Or do you want that they are careful with accepting news selectively (for example distrusting/verifying only official news, while accepting without hesitation "alternative" news)? If so, then by which pattern? It makes no sense to me either.

No sir i made it clear ...if they were going to make a blanket statement to believe nothing without investigation and not go down the obvious slippery slope of telling them what is and what isnt fake ..then great ..but we both no this will not happen ..as almost everything we are taught in government run schools is propaganda ..its happening now .

 

[cloudspotter]

unless they are going to make a simple motto ...QUESTION EVERYTHING ..or believe half of what you see and nothing of what you hear

Something like

they will receive a list of what amounts to a new set of Ten Commandments for the digital age.

Among them: Thou shalt not share unverified news; thou shall ask for sources and evidence; thou shall remember that the internet and social networks can be manipulated.

you mean?

 

[DJC]

Something like

they will receive a list of what amounts to a new set of Ten Commandments for the digital age.

Among them: Thou shalt not share unverified news; thou shall ask for sources and evidence; thou shall remember that the internet and social networks can be manipulated.

you mean?

and how can you create a discussion or start any kind of dialogue if you didnt share unverified news? isnt that what this site is based on ?

 

[deirdre]

and how can you create a discussion or start any kind of dialogue if you didnt share unverified news?

Don't worry there will always be people incapable of critical thinking who will continue to spread bunk.

 

[SR1419]

.90% of the news is fake falsified embellished or out right lies

citation needed.

 

[cloudspotter]

and how can you create a discussion or start any kind of dialogue if you didnt share unverified news? isnt that what this site is based on ?

That's not what this article is about at all.

 

[Inti]

No sir i made it clear ...if they were going to make a blanket statement to believe nothing without investigation and not go down the obvious slippery slope of telling them what is and what isnt fake ..then great ..but we both no this will not happen ..as almost everything we are taught in government run schools is propaganda ..its happening now .

As a former teacher in government funded schools in the UK, for decades, and having been involved in running courses to train teachers, I can assure you that this is not true, in my extensive experience.

Teachers have very often been more than willing to encourage children to think critically about all the views they encounter, and to gain the skills to question alleged facts effectively..

On that theme, on what evidence did you base your claim that teachers will not do so? Did you apply your own advice to accept nothing without question to that view?

 

[DJC]

imagine you had 2 classes one teacher was pro life pro guns anti vaccine didnt believe in global warming didnt believe in evolution and was a conservative

in the other class you had the opposite

which news do you think would be fake in each class?

like i said .. slippery slope

 

[Rory]

imagine you had 2 classes one teacher was pro life pro guns anti vaccine didnt believe in global warming didnt believe in evolution and was a conservative

in the other class you had the opposite

which news do you think would be fake in each class?

like i said .. slippery slope

As long as they were both pro-facts, and somewhat able to keep their opinions and psychologies out of it, I guess it would be okay.

Anyway, can you think of a better way?

 

[cloudspotter]

which news do you think would be fake in each class?

The one that didn't have evidence to support it

 

[MikeG]

No sir i made it clear ...if they were going to make a blanket statement to believe nothing without investigation and not go down the obvious slippery slope of telling them what is and what isnt fake ..then great ..but we both no this will not happen ..as almost everything we are taught in government run schools is propaganda ..its happening now .

I am late to this discussion, but thought I'd add a few ideas.

I have been teaching college for 23 years and might be able to speak from a bit of authority.

You seem to be wedded to a series of basic, black and white concepts that don't really reflect reality. "Almost everything we are taught in government run schools is propaganda"? Really? I teach in a state college and my curricular choices are my own. We offer multiple sections of American history, for example. In mine, I address foreign affairs, governance, and social movements. When students write (and we do emphasize writing skills as well as logic) their essays, they choose one of the three topics.

I ask them to apply simple logic in the process. 1) Make a claim; 2) Offer a proof. Answers are evaluated not on their agreement, but on the completeness of their logic. That way, students can pursue a variety of perspectives that follow a valid process. That approach is thousands of years old.

That said, you seem to think that faculty simply imprint their own biases on unwitting students. I am not going to argue that we are models of objectivity, but there are constructive ways to teach.

Rather than blame the media, or the government, or teachers, I would ask that you keep an open mind.

Better yet, try your hand at teaching someday and see how it works.

 

[Inti]

imagine you had 2 classes one teacher was pro life pro guns anti vaccine didnt believe in global warming didnt believe in evolution and was a conservative

in the other class you had the opposite

which news do you think would be fake in each class?


like i said .. slippery slope

If I was "the opposite" teacher, I wouldn't just try to indoctrinate the class in my view. I'd start out by giving them examples of opposing views and guide them in identifying how they could look for evidence that would help them decide between them.

I'd tie that in with learning how to evaluate how reliable different sources are, I might also get teams of students which already identified with one side of the argument to work on making the best case they could for the opposing view.

And when it comes to science based issues like climate change, I would aim to help them understand that there isn't really "conservative" and "liberal" science, just good, evidence-based and bad, ideological science.And we would look at how we can tell the difference.

When I taught history, for instance, I did an exercise on the Katyn forest massacre of Polish prisoners. Was it committed by the Nazis or the USSR? At that time, that was still an open question.

I gave them summaries of the points of evidence implicating each government, had them identify the points, categorise which pointed to each possible perpetrator and reach reasoned, argued conclusions.

Most decided that it was the Soviets who murdered the prisoners. I didn't tell them this, they questioned and judged for themselves.And most decided it was probably the Soviet government, which we all later found out was correct, when new evidence was revealed after the Soviet Union collapsed.

What's more, the majority of students enjoyed doing this mire than if I'd just given them lists of facts to memorise. They learned something about doing real history, and real critical thinking.

 

[DJC]

If I was "the opposite" teacher, I wouldn't just try to indoctrinate the class in my view. I'd start out by giving them examples of opposing views and guide them in identifying how they could look for evidence that would help them decide between them.

I'd tie that in with learning how to evaluate how reliable different sources are, I might also get teams of students which already identified with one side of the argument to work on making the best case they could for the opposing view.

And when it comes to science based issues like climate change, I would aim to help them understand that there isn't really "conservative" and "liberal" science, just good, evidence-based and bad, ideological science.And we would look at how we can tell the difference.

When I taught history, for instance, I did an exercise on the Katyn forest massacre of Polish prisoners. Was it committed by the Nazis or the USSR? At that time, that was still an open question.

I gave them summaries of the points of evidence implicating each government, had them identify the points, categorise which pointed to each possible perpetrator and reach reasoned, argued conclusions.

Most decided that it was the Soviets who murdered the prisoners. I didn't tell them this, they questioned and judged for themselves.And most decided it was probably the Soviet government, which we all later found out was correct, when new evidence was revealed after the Soviet Union collapsed.

What's more, the majority of students enjoyed doing this mire than if I'd just given them lists of facts to memorise. They learned something about doing real history, and real critical thinking.

You sound like a good teacher ...and how you approached the subject and the direction you gave was great ...if this is the norm then why would they need to set a curriculum to learn this ? and the orders come from the government . havent we already established that they are all liars and push their own agendas ? there are too many controversial subjects to get into but in every one there are two sides .and you wont be able to sway either one back to the other ..unless this is meant just to have one side and to teach impressionable kids this side ...the side you want them to know

 

[deirdre]

and how you approached the subject and the direction you gave was great ...if this is the norm then why would they need to set a curriculum to learn this ?

Because the program is how to tell what is real and fake ON THE INTERNET.

Which of these three examples are REAL news?

1.

2.

3.

 

[Inti]

You sound like a good teacher ...and how you approached the subject and the direction you gave was great ...if this is the norm then why would they need to set a curriculum to learn this ? and the orders come from the government . havent we already established that they are all liars and push their own agendas ? there are too many controversial subjects to get into but in every one there are two sides .and you wont be able to sway either one back to the other ..unless this is meant just to have one side and to teach impressionable kids this side ...the side you want them to know

Thank you, but I have to say that your view of the way things work greatly oversimplified at best. No, we haven't established that the government are all liars, for instance. Yes, governments, and members of governments, do lie sometimes. But we can't simply assume that everything they say is a lie. That is just turning naive acceptance on its head. Simplistic cynicism is just another kind of naivety.

And while governments may have lines they want to push, it isn't true that "the orders come from the government. Teachers, for instance, still have a good deal of choice about what they teach, and how, though that has been somewhat reduced in recent times.

And I have even done some research, paid for out of government funding. Yet nobody told me the conclusions I had to reach.

I have to emphasise that I'm no simple minded defender of any government. I've been a radical and active critic of my own government, and others,.

At one time, I even had reason to fear that I might be falsely accused of aiding terrorists, as others had been (as in the case of the Birmingham bombings). I have also had guns (not just rubber bullets but rifles and submachine guns) pointed at me by the RUC in the North of Ireland, on a peaceful civil rights march. I had only to turn my head to see the place a short distance away where the British Army's Parachute Regiments hot down 28 unarmed demonstrators 9 years earlier. That makes the question rather personal. So, like other people discussing here, I'm not closed minded or a shill or a blind defender of the status quo. But I do want to base my beliefs about politics and history and science and so on on sound, testable evidence.

 

[Inti]

... there are too many controversial subjects to get into but in every one there are two sides .and you wont be able to sway either one back to the other ..unless this is meant just to have one side and to teach impressionable kids this side ...the side you want them to know

Do why do you say that? Actually, there can be more than two sides, of course. And I have described how I didn't try to sway impressionable kids to one side, but to give them the tools to judge and question for themselves.

 

[NoParty]

...college kids get hypnotized by these professors and adopt their ideology .

Was this your experience?
(it sure wasn't mine).

 

[deirdre]

Was this your experience?
(it sure wasn't mine).

colleges in general do tend to be very liberal/progressive. Although there are some conservative professors for sure!

and @DJC some of the biggest Conspiracy Theorist leaders were college professors Fetzer, James Tracy, Eowyn from Fellowship of the Minds are 3 that come to mind.

add: and David Hodges.. he is even teaching in high schools now.

But the topic of the OP is high school.

 

[DJC]

Heres a quick example of propaganda and government involvement in schools ..while Obama was in office he is responsible for murdering close to a million people with drone strikes cruise missiles arming a militant group etc ..hes just a war criminal ..

and they renamed the school after him and when they tore down the statue of davis they kicked it ? Why? WHo told them to be angry ? its an elementary school from 5 - 12 years old

was it just because 98% of the school was black ? does anyone care that he is a war criminal ? i guess they wont tell the students about that part ...

An elementary school in Mississippi is switching out the president of the Confederacy for the first black president.

Davis Elementary School in Jackson will be renamed Barack Obama Elementary School for the next school year.
The school was named for Jefferson Davis decades ago, says CNN affiliate WAPT. But parents at the school, which is 98% African-American, proposed renaming the school to honor America's 44th president.

 

[deirdre]

But parents at the school, which is 98% African-American, proposed renaming the school to honor America's 44th president.

Why are you blaming the government, if parents almost unanimously proposed it?

and please answer my post #22. Because that is what the OP is about.

 

[DJC]

Why are you blaming the government, if parents almost unanimously proposed it?

and please answer my post #22. Because that is what the OP is about.

Im asking if the school will tell the students that the school is named after a man that is responsible for bombing 8 countries and murdering close to or over a million people ? ... or will they tell the kids he was a great man ..? will they tell the truth or not ..this is what you get in government run schools .

as far as #22 .i dont know what those pics are .if they are real or not ?

 

[deirdre]

or will they tell the kids he was a great man

Did they tell the students that Davis was a great man? What does it matter how the school in your example teaches Obama, the parents obviously think he is a great man.

as far as #22 .i dont know what those pics are .if they are real or not ?

then you probably need the course in the OP.

 

[Mick West]

as far as #22 .i dont know what those pics are .if they are real or not ?

Would you like your children to be able to tell if they are real or not?

 

[DJC]

Would you like your children to be able to tell if they are real or not?

there isnt enough information to tell if they are true ?

tell me which one of these pics shows the new planets nasa found and which are the bottom of frying pans ?

see the problem ?

 

[Mick West]

there isnt enough information to tell if they are true ?

tell me which one of these pics shows the new planets nasa found and which are the bottom of frying pans ?

see the problem ?

No, I don't see the problem. I know how to find out if those are images of planets, and I know how to check the other three images.

So really the problem is that you do not know how to do this. So, would you like to learn? Would you like your children (or any children) to learn?

 

[DJC]

No, I don't see the problem. I know how to find out if those are images of planets, and I know how to check the other three images.

So really the problem is that you do not know how to do this. So, would you like to learn? Would you like your children (or any children) to learn?

The point was to find out yes ? and how can u find out if those very very happy people in the pic just had a child murdered days before and just wanted to take a pic with Obama who happens to be a murderer . That would be my question

 

[Mick West]

The point was to find out yes ? and how can u find out if those very very happy people in the pic just had a child murdered days before and just wanted to take a pic with Obama who happens to be a murderer . That would be my question

So you want to know how? Do you also think it's a good idea to teach children how to figure out things like this? (or at least with age-appropriate topics)

I presume you at least figured out the daisies? Do you think children should be taught about fake news like that?

 

[txt29]

tell me which one of these pics shows the new planets nasa found and which are the bottom of frying pans ?
see the problem ?

Personally, I do not see the problem. None of the pictures can be a true image of any newly discoverd planet, because no photos of exoplanets exist (with the exception of 2-3 pixels large images in some rare cases). The images can be maximally artists' presentations of planets as they imagine them. Pictures that are frying pans can be easily used for that purpose if it suits the artist. So you see, it is enough to use just a bit of critical thinking and fact checking, and you can answer this question without problems too.

 

[deirdre]

None of the pictures can be a true image of any newly discoverd planet,

none of them are new planets. DJC likes to spread bunk.
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap130401.html

 

[Mick West]

none of them are new planets. DJC likes to spread bunk.
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap130401.html

To be fair though I've seen the frying pan meme used quite seriously by other flat earthers. Although I suspect the original creator of the meme was not serious.

But that's the type of thing we need to teach our kids about now. Trolls, memes, and poes.

 

[DJC]

none of them are new planets. DJC likes to spread bunk.
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap130401.html

the frying pan pic is very easy to figure out ..post #36 did it very easy ..
but the picture you posted about the laughing happy parents asking the question do they look like their child was just murdered .......NO they do not ....but how would we know what the answer is ? its impossible to answer that question with that pic.
in which case you your belief in what they are doing or thinking or what happened is bias to discerning if its fake news or not ..
is that what they are going to teach .my original posted isnt hard to understand ..i said it would be a slippery slope since there are too many subjects and too many factors ..there is too much propaganda there are too many lies there are too many things to consider ..unless
you are just saying dont believe anything until you research it .and even then your conclusion may not be correct ..

besides why does anyone care about the third picture ...why would a high school kid have to understand whats going on there ...its not part of their reality ts not part of their life it doesnt affect them in any way.....


Question - Do the parents in that pic look like they just had a child murdered 4 days before ?

@Mick West
@deirdre
?

 

[DJC]

To be fair though I've seen the frying pan meme used quite seriously by other flat earthers. Although I suspect the original creator of the meme was not serious.

But that's the type of thing we need to teach our kids about now. Trolls, memes, and poes.

thanks that was the purpose of posting it ..there are a million of these pics about everything on dif subjects

[off topic text removed]